Saturday September 27, 2025
NAIROBI, Kenya (HOL) — A Nairobi court has acquitted Somali national Abdihakim Saidi Jama of
charges of fraudulently obtaining Kenyan identification documents, giving false information to public officers, and unlawful presence in the country, after ruling the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Principal Magistrate Rose Ndombi, delivering judgment on September 22, 2025, said the evidence against Jama was riddled with “critical gaps” and inconsistencies that could not sustain a conviction.
Jama had faced three charges stemming from a 2011 application for a national ID card in Isiolo. The case later shifted across different courts after he was initially arraigned on
unrelated assault charges against whistleblower Ayni Hussein Mahammud at Makadara before being charged at Milimani Law Courts.
The prosecution called seven witnesses, including Ayni Hussein Mahammud, who told the court she had known Jama since childhood in Mogadishu and insisted he was not Kenyan. She also linked him to a YouTube campaign video for a Somali parliamentary seat under a different name. The magistrate dismissed her testimony, noting she provided no supporting documents and appeared motivated by a personal fallout with Jama.
Another witness, Fatuma Mohamed, whose ID number appeared on Jama’s application, denied being his mother and testified that none of her eight children was the accused. The magistrate faulted the prosecution for failing to summon registration officials or local elders who vetted the ID application, calling this a “critical gap.”
Jama’s defence produced Kenyan death certificates for his late parents, while Ndombi noted that, as an illiterate man, he may have relied on others to complete application forms. She emphasized that citizenship by birth is inalienable and cannot be revoked without due process.
“Suspicion, however strong, cannot form the basis of a conviction,” Ndombi ruled, acquitting Jama under Section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The ruling came despite Mahammud’s repeated petitions to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, in which she alleged irregular handling of the case and even reported death threats linked to the accused. Through her lawyers, she urged prosecutors to add charges including forgery and personation, but the court found insufficient evidence.
Mahammud and her lawyers are indicating plans to appeal the decision.